tv [untitled] August 26, 2010 4:30pm-5:00pm PST
>> thank you for your patience in this time that we return to get our technical difficulties resolved. i just want to remind everyone to turn off any pagers, cell phones, the electronic devices that may go off. please speak directly into the microphone when addressing the body and we ask that you state and spell your name for the record. [roll call]
thank you, commissioners. the item before the body is case number 2007.0903e the treasure island/your boy now i'll in the redevelopment project. >> -- your balbuena island -- yerba buena island redevelopment project. >> this is a presentation on the draft environmental impact report on the redevelopment project. as you have heard in greater detail in the previous presentations, the proposed project, which will be carried on by the master developer
treasure island community of llc would include development on treasure island and near yerba buena island of up to 140,000 square feet of commercial and retail space, up to 100,000 square feet of new office space, adaptive reuse for buildings on treasure island, with up to 311,000 square feet of commercial retail or flex space, 500 hotel rooms, rehabilitation of historic buildings on yerba buena island, new or upgraded public facilities, new or upgraded utilities, 300 acres of park or open space, including shoreline access or cultural uses, new and upgraded streets and public ways, bicycle, transit, and to the facilities, landslide and
waters of the sow is for the treasure island sailing center, lan/services for expanded marine and, and a new ferry terminal and intermodal hub. construction bill the other oppose product would be faced and that its bid to occur over approximate 15-20-year period. the draft eir of death was potentially significant an unavoidable impact on aesthetics, historic architectural resources, transportation, noise, air quality, wind, and biological resources. please note the staff is not here today to answer comment on the draft eir. all comics will be transcribed and responded to in writing in income than responses document, which will respond to all written and verbal comments received, and make revisions as appropriate. i would like to remind all
speakers this is not a hearing to consider approval or disapproval of the proposed project. approval hearings will follow final eir certification. your comments today should be confined to the adequacy and accuracy of the information and analysis contained in the draft eir. i would also like to request that you speak as slowly and clearly as possible so that the court reporter can produce an accurate transcript of today's hearing. also,, two should state their name and address so they can be properly identified and then receive a copy of the comments and copy of the response document when it is completed. after general comments, we will receive comments on the draft eir by the members of the commission and board. public comment for this eir began on july 10 and extend until august 6. the historic preservation
committee held a presentation on the draughty and are on june 24 and determined there were no comments. however, members of the commission expressed their desire for the project to include a monument to those who served on the island during its military. , perhaps employing materials used from that era, such as the cannon at the entrance to treasure island. at the hearing, they readily agreed to pursue this project element. this concludes my presentation on less commissioners, board members have questions. we can open up the public hearing. >> thank you. project staff. >> we have no additional comments. >> we have a number of speaker cards.
i will repeat. my name is bernard chilton. i am a san francisco to more representative, whether due diligence has been exercised regarding title to treasure island that must be cleared in a court with federal law, the arkansas act of 1850, that said lands belonging and high time, including louisiana, texas, florida, along to the state of california for ever and in perpetuity. clear that is foremost because the litigation that will be required to pay for and the environmental defense of the island will not be operable. also, federal law will put certain operational constraints that need to be cleared first. then you can do your job.
my second question deals with my background as an architectural engineer, as to whether there is sufficient tests regarding compaction of the sand, for example, from the earthquake. under mild conditions, it can cause much of the pipe on the island to be damaged. you have got your answer. a severe earthquake, in effect, this proposal will not stand. if you have copies, there are various legal correspondence that i had come as a representative of the state, representing the severity of the title. thank you for your attention.
>> good morning, tim colon. executive director of the san francisco executive housing coalition. we have been watching this for a couple of years now and we are excited about it. this project, as much as any we have seen, will push the envelope, expand what is possible. where the direction of the new housing and communities will go in the united states. one of the curious features about the island, its relative isolation in terms of its connection to the bridge, i think that will turn out to be a huge plus for it because of the way the project is approaching transportation, minimizing the influence of cars. we love this project. we hope it will move forward as quickly as possible. we are heartbroken about the current economic conditions that are holding it back. i think anything you can do to
move it forward quickly is all to the good. thank you. >> manny flores. paul currier. >> danny flores. we are here in full support of the project. it is a no-brainer. we are excited about it. we would like to plant the seed now and get going. we are currently already up there. the united brotherhood of carpenters, we are partners with the job corps out there, so we have a training facility there. we have already landed. we just need the jobs. we are currently looking for more women in the program also. we will be looking for your blessing for the treasure island
project. thank you. >> thank you. >> sherry williams, executive director of the treasure island development agency. we are proud to make comments today as this next milestone is before you. the plan represents a real opportunities to provide housing and jobs for formerly homeless and low-income san franciscans. the eir sites the housing that will be available for tida and john carpenter news that will be created for redevelopment. we look forward to expanding the number of formerly homeless people who will now have a place to call home, as well as those who earn an income through the tida middle of that. a key component for us is none of the existing residence will be displaced. all will have an opportunity for housing. in a land use section, tida occupies the fitness center and
gymnasium. for the record, we no longer operate the gymnasium. however, we do use the former fitness center as a community center. this is a critical resource for existing residence. it is the site of numerous community meetings, events, a food pantry program, computer workshop, a venue for residents to come together as a community. beyond our sights there is space allocated for community center and redevelopment, and we are pleased to see this. over the past 13 years we have tried to create and support communities by providing at least basic services such as child care, your programming, recreation programming, and so on. it is important to us and the future of the new treasure island community to have such things in place. we assumed the 48,500 square feet allocated to the community center and the 30,000 square feet for community services will
be used to support everything from youth programming to air on the center to general purpose community center, like we have currently. it will be important to keep these basic services in place to support existing residence as construction occurs until their replacements are developed. we are supportive of the project, and we, too, are looking forward to implementing it. >> thank you. >> nick rossi. i have reviewed the draft eir and i have the following comment. we believe there is no mechanism for the perimeter burned. it is not addressed in the hazards and hydrology section. storm waters and floods are done to make sure that they can
maintain future operations -- i am constrained by the three minutes. believe the future operation and maintenance should be included by the product description and further analysis should be evaluated. in the previous staff reports, i would refer to to be an addendum of the commission meeting from friday august to, north coast district item f4a, local coastal program amendment crcmaj-1-09, for the alliances and purposes of the sale of all rate of 3 p per century is going to be used. you mentioned in the report tsunami hazards should account for sea levels of 3 feet 26 p per century, however, project plans only accommodate 36 inches of c rise and an additional 6
inches of freeboard. however, we believe it will not be adequate for the lifetime of the project. no definitive publication had been produced that addresses the sea level rise, which makes it impossible to determine the appropriate height. it is conceivable in the lifetime of the project, the sea level may increase more than a product design. see level is problematic for treasure island. we believe the coastal commission, because this project involves rezoning plan amendment, a discussion of its requirements should have been included. under government code 6560a, it requires a land use as authorized the under programs and general specific uses in the general plan. we think the omission of the coastal commission's involvement is a serious violation.
i mentioned before -- [inaudible] tsunami location. not think their response plan respond adequately to that or provide a corporate responses. with respect to the waste water pull the discussion, as you may know, the regional water quality board will permit a new facility, however, there has not been a discussion about the waste reduction, as required under the waste management act of 1999. that plays into the greenhouse discussion. we would like to have a further study on how the greenhouse gases are going to be studied, with respect to waste reduction. may i have one more minute? >> thank you. as you know, -- >> may i have 60 more seconds?
>> you may not. comments may be received in her writing until the 26th of this month. certainly, you and anyone else should feel free to submit those. they will be considered as oral comments. >> i will do that. as a parting shot, regional housing needs proper allocation -- >> thank you. >> good morning, ladies and all men. my name is paul courier. i am an internet community organizer. some of the people who will be watching this nomy nationwide as one of the obama organizers. i want to run as mayor in san francisco in 2011. i am speaking in the public house, on behalf of the public interest, and i am shocked.
it is nice to be here in a room that is owned by the people and city and county of san francisco. it is nice to see you people in the chambers of the elected representatives and using this facility for the planning and development of treasure island. i would like to ask a simple question. are we going to turn ourselves for what we already own? are we going to delegate that to corporations through charge us read for the resources that are already ours? is that what we are going to do? are we going to disrespect the fact that this property was owned by the federal government and there is a title claim that one of the other dunham and has already spoke about today? we are going to disregard the people and city in the state of california, the claims of the coastal commission to regulate the coast properties and waters.
that is what we are going to do? i would caution us to pay attention to what is happening here. i want to talk about reasonable concepts. one of them is called secrecy, the next one is craft. another one is called crash and. maybe some of you have profited from it. maybe not. how come there is no inspector general function and this? we are privatizing 150 acres in napa county of san francisco. there is money at stake here. this is public property. where are the cops, oversight? secrecy. i went into the planning commission, i sat down yes today, and they sent me over to another department, and i was able to get two volumes. this is just one of them. in references two more, it is called the design for
development planning guide. those other two documents, four documents, are not available on- line. how come they're not available? how come i cannot look at the pictures of the high-rises in the financial district that you are proposing to build? how come people from berkeley and alameda and sacramento and stockton cannot look at what the bay bridge will look like when we yolose the view of the golden gate bridge when they drive in? how come the secrecy? maybe because there is a lot of money in those high-rise developments. i want to close with a concept. it appears that we have an organized theft of public property going on with a process of methodology, where incrementally, we take this and
that, and then 30, 50 years, what is left? treasure island is a gem. it belongs to the people of the bay area. hopefully the next supervisor in the district 6 will speak up more. i do not think the environmental impact report should be improved -- approved until it has been open to sunshine and the people in the state of california can see what you are doing. thank you very much. >> thank you. richard willard. can masters. karen weeks. >> good morning. richard willard.
i represent the pile drivers of san francisco. we have a long history of development since the gold rush , had the foundations for the buildings of san francisco. i am the negative, only the positives. jobs are needed in california. for every construction worker employed, it creates many j+residual jobs in the process. the engineering feats in this day, if they can put people on the moon and drive trains under the day, i am sure we can support treasure island to be a positive addition to'róñi the a. a bit of trivia. i worked on the dock to the west side of treasure island in the mid 1980's. there is the longest continuous, 1-npiece i am happy to be able to support
treasure island with many new jobs. if they could just create8u construction work. thank you for your time. >> thank you. >> has my name in as karenweiss. i am speaking on behalf of the bay conservation and development commission. i wanted to draw attention to a letter that was written by our executive director in support of the project and in support of the work that tida had done with us on sea level rise. also, the letter written by the governor in support of the project. thank you. also, we will be providing further comments, written comments, before the time period ends. >> thank you. >> ken masters.
i hope you enjoyed nick's 3 minutes. i probably pay $2,000 for him to do that. time and again the voice of the residents have been shut down. my opposition to this plan starts with a contradiction in the mission statement, which includes, to create community and identity, when actually it will destroy the community and identity that exists. also, the precedents that this creates further empowers for the developers and politicians and weakens the individuals and communities within san francisco. as an example, i called 15 law firms before i found an attorney. all of them had consulates. how does an individual get access to justice if every law firm does not want to take a case,he